Family-Centered Early Intervention Deaf/Hard of Hearing (FCEI-DHH): Guiding Values
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is the second of eight articles in this special issue on Family-Centered Early Intervention (FCEI) for children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) and their families, or FCEI-DHH. Five foundational values that guide FCEI-DHH are described, providing an evidence-informed, conceptual context for the 10 FCEI-DHH Principles and other articles presented in this issue. These values are applicable for Early Intervention (EI) Providers and other professionals on FCEI teams, as well as for FCEI-DHH programs/services and systems. The five key values include (1) being family-centered, (2) responding to diversity, (3) involving invested parties, especially families and individuals who are DHH, (4) supporting holistic child development, and (5) ensuring fundamental human rights. These evidence-informed values are considered essential to the effective provision of FCEI-DHH supports. This is the second of eight articles that comprise a special issue on Family-Centered Early Intervention (FCEI) for families with children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH), or FCEI-DHH. This article highlights the rationale for provision of FCEI-DHH supports for families with children who are DHH, defines key terms relevant to FCEI-DHH, describes the Guiding Values upon which FCEI-DHH supports and interventions are built, and provides international resources that can be used to justify the establishment and implementation of FCEI-DHH across the globe. Based on the evidence of these benefits, FCEI-DHH is strongly endorsed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".